54

MODERN SEWER DESIGN

7 m diameter steel sewer being installed in wet conditions.

3. HYDROLOGY 55

CHAPTER 3 Hydrology
Introduction
The hydrologic cycle is a continuous process whereby water is transported
from ocean and land surfaces to the atmosphere from which it falls again
in the form of precipitation. There are many inter-related phenomena
involved in this process and these are often depicted in a simplistic form as
shown in Figure 3.1. Different specialist interests, such as meteorologists,
oceanographers or agronomists, focus on different components of the
cycle, but from the point of view of the drainage engineer, the relevant part
of the cycle can be represented in idealistic fashion by the block diagram
of Figure 3.2.
The effect of urbanization on the environment is to complicate that part
of the hydrologic cycle which is affected by the modification of natural
drainage paths, impounding of water, diversion of storm water and the
implementation of storm water management techniques.
The objective of this chapter is to introduce the drainage engineer to
different methods for estimating those components of the hydrologic cycle
which affect design decisions—from precipitation to runoff. Emphasis is
placed on the description of alternative methods for analyzing or simulat-
ing the rainfall-runoff process, particularly where these apply to computer
models. This should help the user of these models in determining appropri-
ate data and interpreting the results thereby lessening the “black box”
impression with which users are often faced.
Inevitably it is necessary to describe many of these processes in math-
ematical terms. Every effort has been made to keep the presentation simple
but some fundamental knowledge of hydrology has been assumed.

Precipitation g
llin
n
tio

Fa
nd
ta

ion

In
ge

Po

irat
Ve

from Soil
rom

Evaporation
om

nsp
nF
Fr

Tra

Gr
ou
tio

From Streams

From Oceans

nd
ora

Evaporation

Su
rfa
ap

ce
Ev

Temporary Storage
Ground Water
Infiltration

To Vegetation
To Soil
To Streams Ocean Storage
To Ocean

Figure 3.1 Hydrologic cycle - where water comes from and where it goes. From M. G.
Spangler’s “Soil Engineering” 1
56 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Precipitation

Runoff Losses

Subsurface Flow
and Ground Water

Receiving Bodies
of Water

Evaporation

Figure 3.2 Block diagram—Hydrologic Cycle

ESTIMATION OF RAINFALL
The initial data required for drainage design is a description of the rainfall.
In most cases this will be a single event storm, i.e., a period of significant
and continuous rainfall preceeded and followed by a reasonable length of
time during which no rainfall occurs. Continuous rainfall records extend-
ing many days or weeks may sometimes be used for the simulation of a
system, particularly where the quality rather than the quantity of runoff
water is of concern.
The rainfall event may be either historic, taken from recorded events or
idealized. The main parameters of interest are the total amount (or depth)
of precipitation (P tot), the duration of the storm (t d) and the distribution of
the rainfall intensity (i) throughout the storm event. The frequency of oc-
currence (N) of a storm is usually expressed in years and is an estimate
based on statistical records of the long-term average time interval which is
expected to elapse between successive occurrences of two storms of a par-
ticular severity (e.g., depth Ptot in a given time td). The word “expected” is
emphasized because there is absolutely no certainty that after a 25-year
storm has occurred, a storm of equal or greater severity will not occur for
another 25 years. This fact, while statistically true, is often difficult to con-
vey to residents of an area.
3. HYDROLOGY 57

Rainfall Intensity-Duration Frequency Curves

Rainfall intensity-duration frequency curves are derived from the statisti-
cal analysis of rainfall records compiled over a number of years. Each curve
represents the intensity-time relationship for a certain return frequency,
from a series of storms. These curves are then said to represent storms of a
specific return frequency.
The intensity, or the rate of rainfall is usually expressed in depth per unit
time with the highest intensities occurring over short time intervals and
progressively decreasing as the time intervals increase. The greater inten-
sity of the storm, the lesser their recurrence frequency; thus the highest
intensity for a specific duration for N years of records is called the N year
storm, with a frequency of once in N years.
The curves may be in the graphical form as the example shown in Figure
3.3, or may be represented by individual equations that express the time
intensity relationships for specific frequencies, in the form:

a
i=
(t + c)b
where i = intensity (mm/hr)
t = time in minutes
a, b, c = constants developed for each IDF curve

The fitting of rainfall data to the equation may be obtained by either

graphical or least square methods.2
It should be noted that the IDF curves do not represent a rainfall pattern,
but are the distribution of the highest intensities over time durations for a
storm of N frequency.
The rainfall intensity-duration curves are readily available from govern-
mental agencies, local municipalities and towns, and as such are widely
used in the designing of storm drainage facilities and flood flow analysis.

Rainfall Hyetographs
The previous section discussed the dependence of the average rainfall in-
tensity of a storm on various factors. Of great importance from historical
rainfall events is the way in which the precipitation is distributed in time
over the duration of the storm. This can be described using a rainfall
hyetograph which is a graphical representation of the variation of rainfall
intensity with time. Rainfall hyetographs can be obtained (usually in tabu-
lar rather than graphical form) from weather stations which have suitable
records of historical rainfall events. Figure 3.4 shows a typical example.
58 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

200

175
Rainfall intensity (mm/hr)

150 100-Year Frequency

50
125 25
10
100
5-Year
75

50

10 20 30 40 60 80 100

Rainfall duration (Minutes)

Figure 3.3 Rainfall intensities for various storm frequencies vs. rainfall duration

50
Intensity (mm/hr)

25

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Time (Minutes)

Figure 3.4 Rainfall hyetograph

3. HYDROLOGY 59

Conventionally, rainfall intensity is plotted in the form of a bar graph. It

is thus implicitly assumed that the rainfall intensity remains constant over
the timestep used to describe the hyetograph. Obviously this approxima-
tion becomes a truer representation of reality as the timestep gets smaller.
However, very small timesteps may require very large amounts of data to
represent a storm and can increase the computational cost of simulation
considerably. At the other extreme, it is essential that the timestep not be
too large, especially for short duration events or very small catchments,
otherwise peak values of both rainfall and runoff can be “smeared” with
consequent loss of accuracy. When using a computer model this point should
be kept in mind since it is usual to employ the same timestep for both the
description of the rainfall hyetograph and the computation of the runoff
hyetograph. Choice of timestep is therefore influenced by:

a) accuracy of rainfall-runoff representation,

b) discretization of the available data,
c) size of the watershed, and
d) computational storage and cost.

Synthetic Rainfall Hyetographs

An artificial or idealized hyetograph may be required for a number of rea-
sons, two of which are noted here.

a) The historic rainfall data may not be available for the location or
the return frequency desired.
b) It may be desirable to standardize the design storm to be used within
a region in order that comparisons of results from various studies
may be made.
The time distribution of the selected design hyetograph will significantly
affect the timing and magnitude of the peak runoff. Care should therefore
be taken in selecting a design storm to ensure that it is representative of the
rainfall patterns in the area under study. In many cases, depending upon
the size of the watershed and degree of urbanization, it may be necessary
to use several different rainfall hyetographs to determine the sensitivity of
the results to the different design storms. For example, when runoff from
pervious areas is significant, it will be found that late peaking storms pro-
duce higher peak runoff than early peaking storms of the same total depth
as the latter tend to be reduced in severity by the initially high infiltration
capacity of the ground.
Selection of the storm duration will also influence the hydrograph char-
acteristics. The Soil Conservation Service Handbook3 recommends that a
six hour storm duration be used for watersheds with a time of concentra-
tion less than or equal to six hours. For watersheds where the time of con-
centration exceeds six hours the storm duration should equal the time of
concentration.
A number of different synthetic hyetographs are described in the follow-
ing sections. These include:

a) uniform rainfall as in the rational method,

b) the Chicago hyetograph,
c) the SCS design storms,
d) Huff’s storm distribution patterns.
60 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Uniform Rainfall
The simplest possible design storm is to assume that the intensity is uni-
formly distributed throughout the storm duration. Thus

Ptot
i = iave =
td

This simplified approximation is used in the rational method with the

further assumption that the storm duration is equal to the time of concen-
tration of the catchment. (see Figure 3.5). Use of a rectangular rainfall
distribution is seldom justified or acceptable nowadays, except for first cut
or “back-of-the-envelope” estimates. It can, however, have some use in
explaining or visualizing rainfall runoff processes since any hyetograph
may be considered as a series of such uniform, short duration pulses of
rainfall.

tc t

Figure 3.5 Uniform rainfall

The Chicago Hyetograph

The Chicago hyetograph 4 is assumed to have a time distribution such that
if a series of ever increasing “time-slices” were analyzed around the peak
rainfall, the average intensity for each “slice” would lie on a single curve
of the IDF diagram. It, therefore, implies that the Chicago design storm
displays statistical properties which are consistent with the statistics of the
IDF curve. The synthesis of the Chicago hyetograph, therefore, starts with
the parameters of an IDF curve together with a parameter (r) which defines
the fraction of the storm duration which occurs before the peak rainfall
intensity. The value of r is derived from the analysis of actual rainfall events
and is generally in the range of 0.3-0.5.
3. HYDROLOGY 61

The continuous curves of the hyetograph in Figure 3.6 can be computed

in terms of the times before (tb) or after (ta) the peak intensity by the two
equations below.

a) After the peak [

a (1 — b)
ta
1-r
+c ]
ia =
ta 1+b
( 1-r )
+c

b) Before the peak [

a (1 — b)
tb
r
+c ]
ib =
( tb
r )
+c
1+b

where: ta = time after peak

tb = time before peak
r = ratio of time before the peak occurs to the total duration time

Rainfall
Intensity
(mm/hr)
300

275

250 tb ta

225

200 [
ib =
a (1 — b)
tb
r
+c ] ia =
[
a (1 — b)
ta
1-r
+c ]
175

150
( tb
r
+c )1+b
(ta
1-r
+c )1+b

125

100
75

50

25

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Time (Minutes)
Figure 3.6 Chicago hyetograph
62 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

The Chicago storm is commonly used for small to medium watersheds

(0.25 km2 to 25 km2) for both rural or urbanized conditions. Typical storm
durations are in the range of 1.0 to 4.0 hours. It has been found that peak
runoff flows computed using a Chicago design storm are higher than those
obtained using other synthetic or historic storms. This is due to the fact
that the Chicago storm attempts to model the statistics of a large collection
of real storms and thus tends to present an unrealistically extreme distribu-
tion. Another point to note is that the resultant peak runoff may exhibit
some sensitivity to the time step used; very small timesteps giving rise to
slightly more peaked runoff hydrographs.

The Huff Rainfall Distribution Curves

Huff5 analyzed the significant storms in 11 years of rainfall data recorded
by the State of Illinois. The data was represented in non-dimensional form
by expressing the accumulated depth of precipitation Pt (i.e., at time t after
the start of rainfall) as a fraction of the total storm depth Ptot and plotting
this ratio as a function of a non-dimensional time t/td.
The storms were grouped into four categories depending on whether the
peak rainfall intensity fell in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th quarter (or quartile) of
the storm duration. In each category a family of curves was developed rep-
resenting values exceeded in 90%, 80%, 70%, etc., of the storm events.
Thus the average of all the storm events in a particular category (e.g., 1st
quartile) is represented by the 50% exceedence curve. Table 3.1 shows the
dimensionless coefficients for each quartile expressed at intervals of 5%
of t d.
The first quartile curve is generally associated with relatively short du-
ration storms in which 62% of the precipitation depth occurs in the first
quarter of the storm duration. The fourth quartile curve is normally used

Table 3.1 Dimensionless Huff storm coefficients

Pt /Ptot for quartile
t/td 1 2 3 4
0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.05 0.063 0.015 0.020 0.020
0.10 0.178 0.031 0.040 0.040
0.15 0.333 0.070 0.072 0.055
0.20 0.500 0.125 0.100 0.070
0.25 0.620 0.208 0.122 0.085
0.30 0.705 0.305 0.140 0.100
0.35 0.760 0.420 0.155 0.115
0.40 0.798 0.525 0.180 0.135
0.45 0.830 0.630 0.215 0.155
0.50 0.855 0.725 0.280 0.185
0.55 0.880 0.805 0.395 0.215
0.60 0.898 0.860 0.535 0.245
0.65 0.915 0.900 0.690 0.290
0.70 0.930 0.930 0.790 0.350
0.75 0.944 0.948 0.875 0.435
0.80 0.958 0.962 0.935 0.545
0.85 0.971 0.974 0.965 0.740
0.90 0.983 0.985 0.985 0.920
0.95 0.994 0.993 0.995 0.975
1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
3. HYDROLOGY 63

for longer duration storms in which the rainfall is more evenly distributed
over the duration td and is often dominated by a series of rain showers or
steady rain or a combination of both. The third quartile has been found to
be suitable for storms on the Pacific seaboard.
The study area and storm duration for which the distributions were de-
veloped vary considerably, with td varying from 3 to 48 hours and the drain-
age basin area ranging from 25 to 1000 km.2 The distributions are most
applicable to midwestern regions of North America and regions of similar
rainfall climatology and physiography.
To use the Huff distribution the user need only specify the total depth of
rainfall Ptot the duration td and the desired quartile. The curve can then be
scaled up to a dimensional mass curve and the intensities obtained by
discretizing the mass curve for the specified timestep, t.

SCS Storm Distributions

The U.S. Soil Conservation Service design storm was developed for vari-
ous storm types, storm durations and regions in the United States.3 The
storm duration was initially selected to be 6 hours. Durations of up to 48
hours have, however, been developed. The rainfall distribution varies, based
on duration and location. The 6, 12 and 24 hour distributions for the SCS
Type II storm are given in Table 3.2. This distribution is used in all regions
of the United States and Canada with the exception of the Pacific coast.
The design storms were initially developed for large (25km2) rural ba-
sins. However, both the longer duration (6 to 48 hour) and shorter 1 hour
thunderstorm distributions have been used in urban areas and for smaller
areas.
Table 3.2 SCS Type II rainfall distribution for 3h, 6h, 12h and 24h durations
3 Hour 6 Hour 12 Hour 24 Hour
Time Finc Fcum Time Finc Fcum Time Finc Fcum Time Finc Fcum
end’g (%) (%) end’g (%) (%) end’g (%) (%) end’g (%) (%)
0.5 1 1
0.5 2 2 1.0 1 2 2 2 2
1.5 1 3
0.5 4 4 1.0 2 4 2.0 1 4 4 2 4
2.5 2 6
1.5 4 8 3.0 2 8 6 4 8
3.5 2 10
1.0 8 12 2.0 4 12 4.0 2 12 8 4 12
4.5 3 15
2.5 7 19 5.0 4 19 10 7 19
5.5 6 25
1.5 58 70 3.0 51 70 6.0 45 70 12 51 70
6.5 9 79
3.5 13 83 7.0 4 83 14 13 83
7.5 3 86
2.0 19 89 4.0 6 89 8.0 3 89 16 6 89
8.5 2 91
4.5 4 93 9.0 2 93 18 4 93
9.5 2 95
2.5 7 96 5.0 3 96 10.0 1 96 20 3 96
10.5 1 97
5.5 2 98 11.0 1 98 22 2 98
11.5 1 99
3.0 4 100 6.0 2 100 12.0 1 100 24 2 100
64 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

The longer duration storms tend to be used for sizing detention facilities
while at the same time providing a reasonable peak flow for sizing the
conveyance system.

ESTIMATION OF EFFECTIVE RAINFALL

Only a fraction of the precipitation which falls during a storm contributes
to the overland flow or runoff from the catchment. The balance is diverted
in various ways.
Evaporation In certain climates it is possible that some fraction of the
rainfall evaporates before reaching the ground. Since rain
fall is measured by gauges on the earth’s surface this
subtraction is automatically taken into account in recorded
storms and may be ignored by the drainage engineer.
Interception This fraction is trapped in vegetation or roof depressions
and never reaches the catchment surface. It is eventually
dissipated by evaporation.
Infiltration Rainfall which reaches a pervious area of the ground
surface will initially be used to satisfy the capacity for
infiltration in the upper layer of the soil. After even quite a
short dry period the infiltration capacity can be quite large
(e.g., 100 mm/hr) but this gradually diminishes after the
start of rainfall as the storage capacity of the ground is
saturated. The infiltrated water will either:
a) evaporate directly by capillary rise;
b) evapotranspirate through the root system of vegetal
cover;
c) move laterally through the soil in the form of interflow
toward a lake or stream; or,
d) penetrate to deeper levels to recharge the ground water.
Surface If the intensity of the rainfall reaching the ground exceeds
Depression the infiltration capacity of the ground, the excess will
Storage begin to fill the interstices and small depressions on the
ground surface. Clearly this will begin to happen almost
immediately on impervious surfaces. Only after these tiny
reservoirs have been filled will overland flow commence
and contribute to the runoff from the catchment. Since these
surface depressions are not uniformly distributed it is quite
possible that runoff will commence from some fraction of
the catchment area before the depression storage on
another fraction is completely filled. Typical recommended
values for surface depression storage are given in Table 3.3.
The effective rainfall is thus that portion of the storm rainfall which con-
tributes directly to the surface runoff hydrograph. This might be expressed
as follows.
Runoff, Qt = Precipitation, Pt - Interception depth
- Infiltrated volume - Surface Depression
Storage
All of the terms are expressed in units of depth.
A number of methods are available to estimate the effective rainfall and
thus the amount of runoff for any particular storm event. These range from
the runoff coefficient C of the rational method to relatively sophisticated
3. HYDROLOGY 65

computer implementations of semi-empirical laws representing the physi-

cal processes. The method selected should be based on the size of the drain-
age area, the data available, and the degree of sophistication warranted for
the design. Three methods for estimating effective rainfall are outlined.

The Runoff Coefficient C (Rational Method)

If an impervious area, A, is subjected to continuous and long lasting rain-
fall of intensity i, then after a time (time of concentration Tc) the runoff
will be given by the equation:
Q = k·i·A
The rational method assumes that all of the abstractions may be repre-
sented by a single coefficient of volumetric runoff C so that in general the
equation reduces to
Q = k·C·i·A
where: Q = runoff in m3/s
i = intensity in mm/hr
A = drainage area in hectares
k = constant = 0.00278
When using the rational method, the following assumptions are
considered:
a)The rainfall intensity is uniform over the entire watershed during
the entire storm duration.
b)The maximum runoff rate occurs when the rainfall lasts as long or
longer than the time of concentration.
c)The time of concentration is the time required for the runoff from
the most remote part of the watershed to reach the point under design.

Table 3.3 Typical recommended values for surface depression storage 6, 7

Land Cover Recommended Value (mm)
Large Paved Areas 2.5
Roofs, Flat 2.5
Fallow Land Field without Crops 5.0
Fields with Crops (grain, root crops) 7.5
Grass Areas in Parks, Lawns 7.5
Wooded Areas and Open Fields 10.0

Since C is the only manipulative factor in the rational formula the runoff
is directly proportional to the value assigned to C. Care should be exer-
cised in selecting the value as it incorporates all of the hydrologic abstrac-
tions, soil types and antecedant conditions. Table 3.4 lists typical values
for C as a function of land use for storms of approximately 5 to 10 year
return period. It is important to note that the appropriate value of C de-
pends on the magnitude of the storm and significantly higher values of C
may be necessary for more extreme storm events. This is perhaps one of
the most serious of the deficiencies associated with this method.
66 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Table 3.4 Recommended runoff coefficients8

Description of Area Runoff Coefficients

Business
Downtown ................................................................................................ 0.70 to 0.95
Neighbourhood ......................................................................................... 0.50 to 0.70
Residential
Single-family ............................................................................................. 0.30 to 0.50
Multi-units, detached ................................................................................ 0.40 to 0.60
Multi-units, attached ................................................................................. 0.60 to 0.75
Residential (suburban) ................................................................................. 0.25 to 0.40
Apartment .................................................................................................... 0.50 to 0.70
Industrial
Light ......................................................................................................... 0.50 to 0.80
Heavy ........................................................................................................ 0.60 to 0.90
Parks, cemeteries ......................................................................................... 0.10 to 0.25
Playgrounds ................................................................................................. 0.20 to 0.35
Railroad yard ................................................................................................ 0.20 to 0.35
Unimproved ................................................................................................. 0.10 to 0.30
It often is desirable to develop a composite runoff based on the percentage of different types
of surface in the drainage area. This procedure often is applied to typical “sample” blocks as a
guide to selection of reasonable values of the coefficient for an entire area. Coefficients with
respect to surface type currently in use are:

Character of Surface Runoff Coefficients

Pavement
Asphalt and Concrete ................................................................................ 0.70 to 0.95
Brick ......................................................................................................... 0.70 to 0.85
Roofs ........................................................................................................... 0.75 to 0.95
Lawns, sandy soil
Flat, 2 percent ........................................................................................... 0.13 to 0.17
Average, 2 to 7 percent .............................................................................. 0.18 to 0.22
Steep, 7 percent ........................................................................................ 0.25 to 0.35
The coefficients in these two tabulations are applicable for storms of 5- to 10-yr frequencies.
Less frequent, higher intensity storms will require the use of higher coefficients because
infiltration and other losses have a proportionally smaller effect on runoff. The coefficients are
based on the assumption that the design storm does not occur when the ground surface is
frozen.
3. HYDROLOGY 67

The Soil Conservation Service Method

The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method3 developed a relationship
between rainfall, (P), retention, (S), and effective rainfall or runoff(Q).
The retention or potential storage in the soil is established by selecting a
curve number (CN). The curve number is a function of soils type, ground
cover and Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC).

The hydrological soil groups, as defined by SCS soil scientists are:

A. (Low runoff potential) Soils having a high infiltration rate even when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively
drained sands or gravel.

B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted and

consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well
drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse texture.

C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted and

consisting chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward
movement of water or soils with moderately fine to fine texture.

D. (High runoff potential) Soils having a very slow infiltration rate when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high
swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a
claypan or clay layer at or near the surface and shallow soils over nearly
impervious material.

Knowing the hydrological soil group and the corresponding land use,
the runoff potential or CN value of a site may be determined. Table 3.5
lists typical CN values.
Three levels of Antecedent Moisture Conditions are considered in the
SCS method. It is defined as the amount of rainfall in a period of five to
thirty days preceding the design storm. In general, the heavier the anteced-
ent rainfall, the greater the runoff potential.

AMC I — Soils are dry but not to the wilting point. This is the lowest
runoff potential.

AMC II — The average case.

AMC III — Heavy or light rainfall and low temperatures having

occurred during the previous five days. This is the highest
runoff potential.

The CN values in Table 3.5 are based on antecedent condition II. Thus,
if moisture conditions I or III are chosen, then a corresponding CN value is
determined (see Table 3.6).
The potential storage in the soils is based on an initial abstraction (Ia)
which is the interception, infiltration and depression storage prior to run-
off and infiltration after runoff.
68 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Table 3.5 Runoff curve numbers2

Runoff curve number for selected agricultural suburban and urban land use (Antecedent
moisture condition II and Ia = 0.2 S)

HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP

LAND USE DESCRIPTION A B C D

Cultivated land1: without conservation treatment 72 81 88 91

with conservation treatment 62 71 78 81

Pasture or range land: poor condition 68 79 86 89

good condition 39 61 74 80

Meadow: good condition 30 58 71 78

Wood or forest land: thin stand, poor cover, no mulch 45 66 77 83

good cover2 25 55 70 77

Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc.

good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 39 61 74 80
fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area 49 69 79 84

Commercial and business areas (85% impervious) 89 92 94 95

Industrial districts (72% impervious) 81 88 91 93

Residential: 3
Average lot size Average % Impervious4
1/20 hectare or less 65 77 85 90 92
1/10 hectare 38 61 75 83 87
3/20 hectare 30 57 72 81 86
1/5 hectare 25 54 70 80 85
2/5 hectare 20 51 68 79 84

Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc.5 98 98 98 98

Streets and roads:

paved with curbs and storm sewers5 98 98 98 98
gravel 76 85 89 91
dirt 72 82 87 89

1
For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National
Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, Aug. 19723.
2
Good cover is protected from grazing and litter and brush cover soil.
3
Curve numbers are computed assuming the runoff from the house and driveway is directed
towards the street with a minimum of roof water directed to lawns where additional infiltration
could occur.
4
The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good pasture condition for these
curve numbers.
5
In some warmer climates of the country a curve number of 95 may be used.
3. HYDROLOGY 69

Table 3.6 Curve number relationships for different antecedent

moisture conditions
CN for CN for CN for CN for
Condition II Conditions I & III Condition II Conditions I & III
100 100 100 60 40 78
99 97 100 59 39 77
98 94 99 58 38 76
97 91 99 57 37 75
96 89 99 56 36 75
95 87 98 55 35 74
94 85 98 54 34 73
93 83 98 53 33 72
92 81 97 52 32 71
91 80 97 51 31 70
90 78 96 50 31 70
89 76 96 49 30 69
88 75 95 48 29 68
87 73 95 47 28 67
86 72 94 46 27 66
85 70 94 45 26 65
84 68 93 44 25 64
83 67 93 43 25 63
82 66 92 42 24 62
81 64 92 41 23 61
80 63 91 40 22 60
79 62 91 39 21 59
78 60 90 38 21 58
77 59 89 37 20 57
76 58 89 36 19 56
75 57 88 35 18 55
74 55 88 34 18 54
73 54 87 33 17 53
72 53 86 32 16 52
71 52 86 31 16 51
70 51 85 30 15 50
69 50 84
68 48 84 25 12 43
67 47 83 20 9 37
66 46 82 15 6 30
65 45 82 10 4 22
64 44 81 5 2 13
63 43 80 0 0 0
62 42 79
61 41 78

The effective rainfall is defined by the relationship.

Q = (P - Ia)2 where S = [(100/CN) -10]·25.4
P + S - Ia
The original SCS method assumed the value of Ia to be equal to 0.2 S.
However, many engineers have found that this may be overly conserva-
tive, especially for moderated rainfall events and low CN values. Under
these conditions the Ia value may be reduced to be a lesser percentage of S
or may be estimated and input directly to the above equation.

The Horton Infiltration Equation

The Horton equation9, which defines the infiltration capacity of the soil,
changes the initial rate, fo, to a lower rate, fc. The infiltration capacity is an
upper bound and is realized only when the available rainfall equals or
70 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

exceeds the infiltration capacity. Therefore, if the infiltration capacity is

given by:
fcap = fc + (fo -fc) e-t·k
Then the actual infiltration, f, will be defined by one or the other of the
following two equations:
f = fcap for i ≥ fcap
f = i for i ≤ fcap
In the above equations:
f = actual infiltration rate into the soil
fcap = maximum infiltration capacity of the soil
fo = initial infiltration capacity
fc = final infiltration capacity
i = rainfall intensity
k = exponential decay constant (1/hours)
t = elapsed time from start of rainfall (hours)
Figure 3.7 shows a typical rainfall distribution and infiltration curve.

Rainfall, (i)
f,i

Infiltration Curve, (f),

at time = t

t Infiltration Curve,
(f), at time = 0

Δt

TIME
Figure 3.7 Representation of the Horton equation

For the initial timesteps the infiltration rate exceeds the rainfall rate.
The reduction in infiltration capacity is dependent more on the reduction
in storage capacity in the soil rather than the elapsed time from the start of
rainfall. To account for this the infiltration curve should, therefore, be shifted
(dashed line for first timestep, Δt) by an elapsed time that would equate the
infiltration volume to the volume of runoff.
3. HYDROLOGY 71

A further modification is necessary if surface depression is to be ac-

counted for. Since the storage depth must be satisfied before overland flow
can occur the initial finite values of the effective rainfall hyetograph must
be reduced to zero until a depth equivalent to the surface depression stor-
age has been accumulated. The final hyetograph is the true effective rain-
fall which will generate runoff from the catchment surface.
The selection of the parameters for the Horton equation depends on soil
type, vegetal cover and antecedent moisture conditions. Table 3.7 shows
typical values for fo and fc (mm/hour) for a variety of soil types under dif-
ferent crop conditions. The value of the lag constant should be typically
between 0.04 and 0.08.

Comparison of the SCS and Horton Methods

Figure 3.8 illustrates the various components of the rainfall runoff process
for the SCS and Horton methods. The following example serves to show
some of the difference between use of the SCS method in which the initial
abstraction is used and the moving curve Horton method in which surface
depression storage is significant. The incident storm is assumed to be rep-
resented by a second quartile Huff curve with a total depth of 50 mm and a
duration of 120 minutes. In one case the SCS method is used with the ini-
tial abstraction set at an absolute value of Ia = 6.1 mm. The curve number
used is 87.6. Figure 3.9(a) shows that no runoff occurs until approximately
30 minutes have elapsed at which time the rainfall has satisfied the initial
abstraction. From that point, however, the runoff, although small, is finite
and continues to be so right to the end of the storm.

Table 3.7 Typical values for the Horton equation parameters9

Sand, Loess,
Loam, Clay Clavey Sand Gravel
K = 0.08 K = 0.06 K = 0.04
Land Surface Types fo fc fo fc fo fc
Fallow land field without crops 15 8 33 10 43 15
Fields with crops
(grain, root crops, vines) 36 3 43 8 64 10
Grassed verges, playground,
ski slopes 20 3 20 3 20 3
Uncompacted grassy surface,
grass areas in parks, lawns 43 8 64 10 89 18
Gardens, meadows, pastures 64 10 71 15 89 18
Coniferous woods 53* 53* 71* 71* 89* 89*
City parks, woodland, orchards 89 53 89 71 89* 89*
*K = 0
72 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Direct Runoff
(effective rainfall)

Storm
Initial Abstraction

SCS

Losses Infiltration

Horton
Surface Depression
Storage

Figure 3.8 Conceptual components of rainfall

70

Initial abstraction
60

50

40 Infiltration
mm/hr

Direct runoff
30

20

10

0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120
Minutes
Figure 3.9a SCS Method with Ia = 6.1 mm and CN = 87.6
3. HYDROLOGY 73

70

Surface depression storage

60

50

40 Infiltration
mm/hr

30

Direct runoff
20

10

0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120
Minutes
Figure 3.9b Horton equation fo = 30mm, fc = 10mm, K = 0.25
Surface depression storage = 4mm

The Horton case is tested using values of fo = 30 mm/hr; fc = 10 mm/hr;

K = 0.25 hour and a surface depression storage depth of 5 mm.
These values have been found to give the same volumetric runoff coeffi-
cient as the SCS parameters. Figure 3.9(b) shows that infiltration com-
mences immediately and absorbs all of the rainfall until approximately 30
minutes have elapsed. However, the initial excess surface water has to fill
the surface depression storage which delays the commencement of runoff
for a further 13 minutes. Moreover, after 72 minutes the rainfall intensity
is less than fc and runoff is effectively stopped at that time.
lt will be found that the effective rainfall hyetograph generated using the
Horton method has more leading and trailing “zero” elements so that the
effective hyetograph is shorter but more intense than that produced using
the SCS method.

ESTABLISHING THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION

Apart from the area and the percentage of impervious surface, one of the
most important characteristics of a catchment is the time which must elapse
until the entire area is contributing to runoff at the outflow point. This is
generally called the Time of Concentration, Tc. This time is comprised of
two components:
(1) The time for overland flow to occur from a point on the perimeter of
the catchment to a natural or artificial drainage conduit or channel.
(2) The travel time in the conduit or channel to the outflow point of the
catchment.
74 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

In storm sewer design the time of concentration may be defined as the

inlet time plus travel time. Inlet times used in sewer design generally vary
from 5 to 20 minutes, with the channel flow time being determined from
pipe flow equations.

Factors Affecting Time of Concentration

The time taken for overland flow to reach a conduit or channel depends on
a number of factors:
a) Overland flow length (L). This should be measured along the line of
greatest slope from the extremity of the catchment to a drainage con-
duit or channel. Long lengths result in long travel times.
b) Average surface slope (S). Since Tc is inversely proportional to S care
must be exercised in estimating an average value for the surface slope.
c) Surface roughness. In general, rough surfaces result in long travel times
and vice versa. Thus, if a Manning equation is used to estimate the
velocity of overland flow, Tc will be proportional to the Manning rough-
ness factor, n.
d) Depth of overland flow (y). It seems reasonable to assume that very
shallow surface flows move more slowly than deeper flows. However,
the depth of flow is not a characteristic of the catchment alone but de-
pends on the intensity of the effective rainfall or surface moisture ex-
cess.
Several methods of estimating the Time of Concentration are described
below. Since it is clear that this parameter has a strong influence on the
shape of the runoff hydrograph, it is desirable to compare the value to that
obtained from observation, if possible. In situations were insufficient his-
torical data is available it may help to compare the results obtained by two
or more methods. The impact on the resultant hydrograph due to using
different methods for establishing the time of concentration should then be
assessed.

The Kirpich Formula

This empirical formula10 relates Tc to the length and average slope of the
basin by the equation:
TC = 0 .00032 L 0.77 S- 0.385 (See Figure 3.10)

Twin outfall lines for major urban storm sewer system.

3. HYDROLOGY 75

3
10
8 4
10000
6 5
8000 5 6
4

H in metres
L in metres

TC in hours
6000 8
5000 3
2 10
4000
3000
1
0.8 20
2000 0.6
0.5 EXAM
PLE
0.4 30
0.3
40
1000 0.2
800 50
60
600 0.1 80
500
100
400
300
Example 200
200 L = 2210 m
H = 39 m
Tc = 0.57 hr 300
400
100
500
600
800
1000
Figure 3.10 Tc nomograph using the Kirpich formula
Where, Tc = time of concentration in hours
L = maximum length of water travel in metres
S = surface slope, given by H/L
H = difference in elevation between the most remote point on
the basin and the outlet, in metres
From the definition of L and S it is clear that the Kirpich equation com-
bines both the overland flow or entry time and the travel time on the chan-
nel or conduit. It is, therefore, particularly important that in estimating the
drop H, the slope S and ultimately the time of concentration Tc, an allow-
ance, if applicable, be made for the inlet travel time.
The Kirpich equation is normally used for natural basins with well de-
fined routes for overland flow along bare earth or mowed grass roadside
channels. For overland flow on grassed surfaces the value of Tc obtained
should be doubled. For overland flow on concrete or asphalt surfaces the
value should be reduced by multiplying by 0.4. For concrete channels, a
multiplying factor of 0.2 should be used.
For large watersheds, where the storage capacity of the basin is signifi-
76 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

cant, the Kirpich formula tends to significantly underestimate Tc.

The Uplands Method
When calculating travel times for overland flow in watersheds with a vari-
ety of land covers, the Uplands Method2 may be used. This method relates
the time of concentration to the basin slope, length and type of ground
cover. The individual times are calculated with their summation giving the
total travel time. A graphical solution can be obtained from Figure 3.11.
However, it should be noted that the graph is simply a log-log plot of val-
ues of V/S0.5 given in the following table.

V/S0.5 Relationship for Various Land Covers

V/S0.5
Land Cover (m/s)
Forest with heavy ground litter, hay meadow (overland flow) 0.6
Trash fallow or minimum tillage cultivation; contour, strip cropped,
woodland (overland flow) 1.5
Short grass pasture (overland flow) 2.3
Cultivated, straight row (overland flow) 2.7
Nearly bare and untilled (overland flow) or alluvial fans in Western
mountain regions 3.0
Grassed waterway 4.6
Paved areas (sheet flow); small upland gullies 6.1

100
90
80
70
60
)
flow

s
50 ion
nd

Reg
erla

40
ain
(ov

unt

30
and

Mo
)

odl
ow

ern
d fl

wo

20
est
rlan

and

in w
ove

ed

ns
w)
opp
w(
Slope (Percent)

l fa
o
w)

lies
ado

d fl
c r

via
o

10
gul
trip

lan
l
me

allu

9
and
ver
or s

a nd
ay

8
d
raig (overl

o
dh

upl
(

7
r

); a
u

w
r an

n to

6
o

ay

all
flow
ht r
u re

terw
; co

sm
litte

5
ast

nd
ion

and
wa
und

erla
, st

4
vat

ss

sed

w);
gro

ted

(ov
a
ulti

ras
t flo
rt g
tiva

3
vy

ec

illed

G
hea

Sho

hee
Cul
illag

unt

a (s
ith

2
nd
um
st w

are
ea
inim
e

ed
bar
For

Pav
or m

rly
Nea
ow

1.0
fall
sh
Tra

0.5
0.03

0.04
0.05
0.06
0.08
0.10

0.20

0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.80
1.00

2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00

Velocity (m/s)

Figure 3.11 Velocities for Upland method for estimating travel time for overland flow
3. HYDROLOGY 77

The Kinematic Wave Method

The two methods described above have the advantage of being quite
straightforward and may be used for either simple or more complex meth-
ods of determining the runoff. Apart from the empirical nature of the equa-
tions, the methods assume that the time of concentration is independent of
the depth of overland flow or, more generally, the magnitude of the input.
A method in common use which is more physically based and which also
reflects the dependance of Tc on the intensity of the effective rainfall is the
Kinematic Wave method.
The method was proposed by Henderson12 to analyze the kinematic wave
resulting from rainfall of uniform intensity on an impermeable plane sur-
face or rectangular area. The resulting equation is as follows:
Tc = k (L n/ S) 0.6 ieff -0.4
in which k = 0.126 for SI units
L = Length of overland flow (m)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
S = Average slope of overland flow (m/m)
i eff = Effective rainfall intensity (mm/hr)

Other Methods
Other methods have been developed which determine Tc for specific geo-
graphic regions or basin types. These methods are often incorporated into
an overall procedure for determining the runoff hydrograph. Before using
any method the user should ensure that the basis on which the time of con-
centration is determined is appropriate for the area under consideration.

DETERMINATION OF THE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH

The following sections outline alternative methods for generating the run-
off hydrograph. Emphasis will be given to establishing the hydrograph for
single storm events. Methods for estimating flow for urban and rural con-
ditions are given.

Ease of installation of CSP through existing concrete box.

78 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Irrespective of the method used, it should be ensured that wherever pos-

sible the results should be compared to historical values. In many cases a
calibration/validation exercise will aid in the selection of the most appro-
priate method.
All of the methods described could be carried out using hand calcula-
tions; however, for all but the simplest cases the exercise would be very
laborious. Furthermore, access to many tested computer models has been
made easier in recent years due to the widespread use of microcomputers.
For these reasons emphasis will be placed on describing the basis of each
method and the relevant parameters. A subsequent section will relate the
methods to several computer models.
Rainfall runoff models may be grouped into two general classifications
which are illustrated in Figure 3.12. One approach uses the concept of ef-
fective rainfall in which a loss model is assumed which divides the rainfall
intensity into losses (i.e., to initial infiltration and depression storage) and
effective rainfall. The effective rainfall hyetograph is then used as input to
a catchment model to produce a runoff hydrograph. It follows from this
approach that infiltration must stop at the end of the storm.
The alternative approach employs a surface water budget in which the
infiltration or loss mechanism is incorporated into the catchment model. In
this method the storm rainfall is used as input and the estimation of infil-
tration and other losses is made an integral part of the calculation of run-
off. This approach implies that infiltration will continue as long as the av-
erage depth of excess water on the surface is finite. Clearly, this may con-
tinue after the cessation of rainfall.

Rainfall

Losses Effective Rainfall

Losses Catchment Model Runoff

Rainfall

Catchment Model Runoff

Losses and Surface

infiltration Depression
Storage

Figure 3.12 Classification of rainfall-runoff models: Effective Rainfall (top)

& Surface Water Budget (bottom)
3. HYDROLOGY 79

SCS Unit Hydrograph Method

A unit hydrograph represents the runoff distribution over time for one unit
of rainfall excess over a drainage area. This method assumes that the ordi-
nates of flow are proportional to the volume of runoff from any storm of
the same duration. Therefore, it is possible to derive unit hydrographs for
various rainfall blocks by convoluting the unit hydrograph with the effec-
tive rainfall distribution. The unit hydrograph theory is based on the fol-
lowing assumptions.

1. For a given watershed, runoff-producing storms of equal duration will

produce surface runoff hydrographs with approximately equivalent time
bases, regardless of the intensity of the rain.

2. For a given watershed, the magnitude of the ordinates representing the

instantaneous discharge from an area will be proportional to the vol-
umes of surface runoff produced by storms of equal duration.

3. For a given watershed, the time distribution of runoff from a given storm
period is independent of precipitation from antecedent or subsequent
storm periods.

The U.S. Soil Conservation Service, based on the analysis of a large

number of hydrographs, proposed a unit hydrograph which requires only
an estimate of the time to peak tp. Two versions of this unit hydrograph
were suggested, one being curvilinear in shape, the other being a simple
asymmetric triangle as shown in Figure 3.13. In the standard procedure the
duration of the recession link is assumed to be tr = ( 5/3) tp so that the time
base is given by tb = (8/ 3)tp.
The ordinates of the unit hydrograph are expressed in units of discharge
per unit depth of effective rainfall. It follows, therefore, that the area under
the triangle must equal the total contributing area of the catchment, so that,
in terms of the notation used in Figure 3.13:

qp = 2 A/tb
= 0.75 A/tp for tb = ( 8/3 ) t p

Expressed in SI units the above equation becomes:

1
qp = 0.75 ( A x 10002 x 1000 ) / ( tp x 3600 )
or qp = 0.208 A / tp

where A is in km2
t p is in hours, and
q p peak flow is in m3/s per mm of effective rainfall

The numerical constant in the above equation is a measure of the storage

in the watershed. This value, generally denoted as B, is usually taken to be
about 0.13 for flat marshy catchments and 0.26 for steep flashy catchments.
80 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

qp

tp tr

tb

Figure 3.13 SCS triangular unit hydrograph

In Figure 3.13 the definitions of D and L are:

D = excess rainfall period (not to be confused with unit time or
unit hydrograph duration)
L = lag of watershed; time of center of mass of excess rainfall
(D) to the time to peak (tp)
The estimate of the time to peak tp is based on the time of concentration
Tc and the time step Δt used in the calculation using the relation:
tp = 0.5 Δt = 0.6 Tc
where Tc may be determined by any acceptable method such as those de-
scribed in the previous section.
From the above equation it can be seen that the time to peak tp, and there-
fore the peak of the Unit Hydrograph qp, is affected by the value of timestep
Δt. Values of Δt in excess of 0.25 tp should not be used as this can lead to
underestimation of the peak runoff.

Rectangular Unit Hydrograph

An alternative option to the triangular distribution used in the SCS method
is the rectangular unit hydrograph. Figure 3.14 illustrates the concept of
convoluting the effective rainfall with a rectangular unit hydrograph. The
ordinate of the unit hydrograph is defined as the area of the unit hydrograph
divided by the time of concentration (Tc).
The rational method is often used as a rough estimate of the peak flow.
This method, which assumes the peak flow occurs when the entire catch-
ment surface is contributing to runoff, may be simulated using a rectangu-
lar unit hydrograph. In this case the effective rainfall hydrograph is re-
duced to a simple rectangular function and ieff = k·C·i. The effective rain-
fall with duration td, is convoluted with a rectangular unit hydrograph which
has a base equal to the time of concentration Tc. If td is made equal to Tc the
resultant runoff hydrograph will be symmetrical and triangular in shape
with a peak flow given by Q = k·C·i·A and time base of tb = 2 Tc. If the
rainfall duration td is not equal to Tc, then the resultant runoff hydrograph
3. HYDROLOGY 81

is trapezoidal in shape with peak flow given by the equation below and a
time base of tb = td = Tc.
Q = k·C·i·A ( td / Tc ) for t d ≤ Tc
and Q = k·C·i·A for td > Tc
This approach makes no allowance for the storage effect due to the depth
of overland flow and results in an “instantaneous ” runoff hydrograph. This
may be appropriate for impervious surfaces in which surface depression
storage is negligible. However, for pervious or more irregular surfaces it
may be necessary to route the instantaneous hydrograph through a hypo-
thetical reservoir in order to more closely represent the runoff hydrograph.

ieff

Effective
Rainfall

Time
t

q Unit Hydrograph

Time
t Tc

Q Runoff Hydrograph

Time

Figure 3.14 Convolution process using a rectangular unit hydrograph

82 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

Linear Reservoir Method

A more complex response function was suggested by Pederson 11 in which
the shape of the unit hydrograph is assumed to be the same as the response
of a single linear reservoir to an inflow of rectangular shape and of dura-
tion Δt. A linear reservoir is one in which the storage S is linearly related
to the outflow Q by the relation:
S = K·Q
where K = the reservoir lag or storage coefficient (e.g., in hours)
In the Pederson method the value of K is taken to be 0.5 Tc where Tc is
computed from the kinematic wave equation in which the rainfall intensity
used is the maximum for the storm being modelled. The use of imax is justi-
fied since this intensity tends to dominate the subsequent runoff hydrograph.
The resulting Unit Hydrograph is illustrated in Figure 3.15 and comprises
a steeply rising limb which reaches a maximum at time t = Δt followed by
an exponential recession limb. The two curves can be described by the
following equations.

q p = (l-e -Δt/k) /Δt at t = Δt

and q = qp • e -(t -Δt)/k for t > Δt

qp = (l-e -Δt/k) /Δt

q
q = q p • e -(t -Δt)/k

Δt Time

Figure 3.15 The single linear reservoir

An important feature of the method is that the unit hydrograph always

has a time to peak at Δt and is incapable of reflecting different response
times as a function of catchment length, slope or roughness. It follows that
the peak of the runoff hydrograph will usually be close to the time of peak
rainfall intensity irrespective of the catchment characteristics.
3. HYDROLOGY 83

y
Q
So
L yd

ƒ
Figure 3.16 Representation of the SWMM/Runoff algorithm

SWMM Runoff Algorithm

The Storm Water Management Model was originally developed jointly for
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1971.13 Since then it has been
expanded and improved by EPA and many other agencies and companies.
In particular, the capability for continuous simulation has been added to
single event simulation, quality as well as quantity is simulated and snow-
melt routines are included in some versions.
The model is intended for use in urban or partly urbanized catchments.
It comprises five main “blocks” of code in addition to an Executive Block
or supervisory calling program. This section describes the basic algorithm
of the Runoff Block which is used to generate the runoff hydrograph in the
drainage system, based on a rainfall hyetograph, antecedent moisture con-
ditions, land use and topography.
The method differs from those described above in that it does not use the
concept of effective rainfall, but employs a surface water budget approach
in which rainfall, infiltration, depression storage and runoff are all consid-
ered as processes occurring simultaneously at the land surface. The inter-
action of these inputs and outputs may be visualized with reference to Fig-
ure 3.16.
Treating each sub-catchment as an idealized, rectangular plane surface
of breadth B and length L, the continuity or mass balance equation at the
land surface is given by the statement:
Inflow = (Infiltration + Outflow) + Rate of Surface Ponding
84 MODERN SEWER DESIGN

That is:
i·L·B = (f·L·B + Q) + L·B· ( Δy/ Δt)
where i = Rainfall intensity
f = Infiltration rate
Q = Outflow
y = Depth of flow over the entire surface
The depth of flow (y) is computed using the Manning equation, taking
into account the depth of depression surface storage (yd) which is also as-
sumed to be uniform over the entire surface. This is the dynamic equation.
Q = B ( 1/n ) (y-yd) 5/3 S1/2
where n = Manning’s roughness coefficient for overland flow
S = Average slope of the overland flow surface
The infiltration rate (f) must be computed using a method such as the
“moving curve” Horton equation or the Green-Ampt model. Infiltration is
assumed to occur as long as excess surface moisture is available from rain-
fall, depression storage or finite overland flow.
It is important to note that the value of Manning’s “n” used for overland
flow is somewhat artificial (e.g., in the range 0.1 to 0.4) and does not rep-
resent a value which might be used for channel flow calculation.
Various methods can be used for the simultaneous solution of the conti-
nuity and dynamic equation. One method is to combine the equations into
one nondifferential equation in which the depth (y) is the unknown. Once
y is determined (e.g., by an interactive scheme such as the Newton-Raphson
method) the outflow Q follows.

COMPUTER MODELS
In recent years, many computer models have been developed for the simu-
lation of the rainfall/runoff process. Table 3.8 lists several of these models
and their capabilities.

Saddle branch manhole is bolted in place.

Table 3.8 Hydrologic computer models
Models

Model
3. HYDROLOGY

HEC-114
HYMO15
HSPF16
ILLUDAS17
MIDUSS18
OTTHYMO19
QUALHYMO20
SCS TR-2021
SCS TR-5521
SSARR22
STANFORD23
STORM24
SWMM13
USDAHL-7425

Characteristics
Model Type:
Single Event • • • • • • • •
Continuous • • • • • • •
Model Components:
Infiltration • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Evapotranspiration • • • • • •
Snowmelt • • • • • • •
Surface Runoff • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Subsurface Flow • • • • • •
Reservoir Routing • • • • • • • • • •
Channel Routing • • • • • • • • • • • •
Water Quality • • • •
Application:
Urban Land Use • • • • • • • •
Rural Land Use • • • • • • • • • • •
Ease of Use:
High • • • • • • • • • •
Low • • • •
85
86
Laying Full Bituminous coated and Full Paved CSP.
REFERENCES
1. Spangler, M.G., Handy, R. L, Soil En-
gineering, 4th Edition, Harper and
Row Publishers, 1982.
2. Urban Hydrology for Small Water-
shed, U.S. Soil Conservation Service,
Technical Release No. 55, 1975.
3. National Engineering Handbook, Sec-
tion 4, Hydrology, U.S. Soil Conser-
vation Service, 1972.
4. Keifer, L. S., Chu, H. H., “Synthetic
Storm Pattern for Drainage Design,”
Proceedings ASCE, 1957.
5. Huff, F. A., “Time Distribution of
Rainfall in Heavy Storms,” Water Re-
sources Research, 3140, pp. 1007-
1019, 1967.
MODERN SEWER DESIGN
6. Tucker, L.S., “Availability of Rainfall
Runoff Data for Partly Sewered Drain-
age Catchments,” ASCE Urban Water
Resources Program, Technical Memo-
randum No. 8.
7. “Hydrograph Volume Method of
Sewer System Analysis,” HVM
Manual, Dorsch Consult Limited, Fed-
eral Republic of Germany, 1987.
8. “Design and Construction of Sanitary
and Storm Sewers,” Water and Pollu-
tion Control Federation Manual of
Practice No. 9 and American Society
of Civil Engineers Manuals and Re-
ports on Engineering Practice No. 37,
1969.
3. HYDROLOGY
9. Horton, R. E., “An Approach Toward
a Physical Interpretation of Infiltration
Capacity,” Soil Science Society of
America Proceedings, 5, pp. 399-417,
1940.
10. Kirpich, Z. P., “Time of Concentration
in Small Agricultural Watersheds,”
Civil Engineering (NewYork), 10,
p. 362, 1940.
11. Pederson, J. T., Peters. J. C., and
Helweg, D. J., “Hydrology by Single
Linear Reservoir Model” Proceedings
ASCE, Journal of Hydraulics Division,
106 (HY5), pp. 837-842,1980.
12. Henderson, F. M., Open Channel
Flow, MacMillan Publishing Com-
pany, Inc., New York, NY, 1966.
13. Huber, W. C., Heaney, J. P., Nix, S.J.,
Dickinson, R. E., and Polmann,D. J.,
“Storm water Management Model
(SWMM), Version III,” Users Manual,
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,
1982.
14. “HEC-1 Flood Hydrograph Package”
Users Manual, Hydrologic Engineer-
ing Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers, Davis, California, 1973.
15. Williams, J. R., Hann, R. W., “HYMO:
Problem Oriented Computer Language
for Hydrologic Modeling,” Users
Manual, Agricultural Research Serv-
ice, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Texas, 1978.
16. Johanson, R. D., Imhoff, J. C. and
Davis, H. H., “Hydrological Simula-
tion Program Fortran (HSPF),” Users
Manual, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Environmental Research
Laboratory, Athens, Georgia, 1980.
17. Terstriep, M. L., Stall, J. B., Illinois
“Urban Drainage Area Simulator
(ILLUDAS), Illinois State Water
Survey,” Bulletin 58, Urbana,
Illinois,1974.
18. Smith, A. A., “Microcomputer Inter-
action Design of Urban Stormwater
Systems (MIDUSS),” Users Manual,
Version 4.2, Dundas, Ontario, 1987.
19. Wisner, P. E., and P’ng, C E.,
OTTHYMO A Model for Master
Drainage Plans, IMPSWMM Pro-
gram, Department of Civil Engineer-
ing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa,
Ontario, 1982.
87
20. Rowney, A. C., Wisner, P. E.,
“QUALHYMO Users Manual,” Re-
lease 1.0, Department of Civil Engi-
neering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa,
Ontario, 1984.
21.“Computer Program for Project Formu-
lation—Hydrology,” Technical Re-
lease No. 20, U.S. Soil Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, 1965.
22. “Streamflow Synthesis and Reservoir
Regulation (SSARR),” Program De-
scription and Users Manual, U.S.
Army Engineer Division, Portland,
Oregon, 1972.
23. Crawford, N. H., Linsley, R. K., “Dig-
ital Simulation in Hydrology: Stanford
Watershed Model IV,” Technical Re-
port No. 39, Department of Civil En-
gineering, Stanford University, 1966.
24. “Storage, Treatment, Overflow Model
(STORM),” Users Manual, Hydro-
logic Engineering Center, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Davis, California,
1977.
25. Holtan, H. N., Stiltner, G. J., Hanson,
M. H., and Lopez, N. C., “USDAHL—
74 Revised Model of Watershed Hy-
drology,” Technical Bulletin No.
1518, Agricultural Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Wash-
ington, D.C., l975.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chow, V. T., Handbook of Applied
Hydrology, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964.
Gray, D. M., Handbook on the Principles
of Hydrology, National Research Council
of Canada, 1970.
Handbook of Steel Drainage and Highway
Construction Products, American Iron and
Steel Institute, 1983.